Monday, May 11, 2009


Ruchard Chappel is back on one of my favourite topics utiltiarianism . And as usual he fires off all my "somthing is wrong on the internet" instincts.

he argues that it is bad to ignore higher-order evidence of our own fallibility. Well the confusing thing is that in one sense I cant imagine a utilitarian arguing that you should ignore your own falibility. I get the feeling there is a straw man being bashed with a stick - and to a degree this is supported by the fact that noone seems to comment on these posts - or at least not with substance. Still maybe he just needs to reference someone who does actually believe that you can ignore "higher order evidence" and still be a functional utilitarian.

There are lots of contentious statements in the post that would be tempting to challenge, but in the end that would just get off topic. Maybe if he directed his position at a real person/philosopher he might avoid that issue - but his current line doesnt seem to attract any substantive comments. I hope he's getting that debate somwhere else.


Post a Comment

<< Home